The Separation of Benign and Malignant Mesothelial Proliferations New Markers and How to Use Them
- 1 November 2020
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) in The American Journal of Surgical Pathology
- Vol. 44 (11), E100-E112
- https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0000000000001565
Abstract
The separation of benign from malignant mesothelial proliferations is an important clinical but often a difficult morphologic problem. Over the last roughly 10 years a variety of new markers that aid in this separation have been published and some older recommended markers reconsidered. Unlike previous, and largely unusable, empiric immunohistochemical (IHC) stains, these new markers, some using IHC and some using fluourescent in situ hybridization (FISH), are largely based on documented genomic abnormalities in malignant mesotheliomas. However, no marker works in all situations; rather, markers need to be chosen by the morphology of the process in question (epithelial vs. spindled) and the body cavity of interest (pleural vs. peritoneal). It is also important to be familiar with the exact pattern, for example nuclear versus cytoplasmic loss, that indicates a positive test. Furthermore, no single marker is 100% sensitive even with the optimal morphology/location, so that combinations of markers are essential. This review covers the various new markers in the literature, highlights their advantages and limitations, and suggests morphology/site specific combinations that can produce sensitivities in the 80% to 90% (and perhaps higher) range. At present only BRCA-1 related protein-1 and methylthioadenosine phosphorylase IHC, andcyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 2A(p16) FISH have sufficient publications and reproducibility of results to be considered as established markers. 5-Hydroxymethyl cytosine, enhancer of zeste homolog 2, cyclin D1, and programmed death-ligand 1 IHC, andNF2FISH are all potentially useful but need further study. The newly described entity of malignant mesothelioma in situ sits at the interface of benign and malignant mesothelial process; criteria for this diagnosis are reviewed.Keywords
This publication has 52 references indexed in Scilit:
- Pan-cancer analysis of whole genomesNature, 2020
- Loss of BAP1 Expression in Atypical Mesothelial Proliferations Helps to Predict Malignant MesotheliomaThe American Journal of Surgical Pathology, 2018
- Diagnostic accuracy of BRCA1-associated protein 1 in malignant mesothelioma: a meta-analysisOncotarget, 2017
- BAP1 regulates IP3R3-mediated Ca2+ flux to mitochondria suppressing cell transformationNature, 2017
- Immunohistochemical detection of MTAP and BAP1 protein loss for mesothelioma diagnosis: Comparison with 9p21 FISH and BAP1 immunohistochemistryLung Cancer, 2016
- New Markers for Separating Benign From Malignant Mesothelial Proliferations Are We There Yet?Archives Of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, 2016
- BAP1 (BRCA1-associated protein 1) is a highly specific marker for differentiating mesothelioma from reactive mesothelial proliferationsLaboratory Investigation, 2015
- BAP1 Immunohistochemistry and p16 FISH to Separate Benign From Malignant Mesothelial ProliferationsThe American Journal of Surgical Pathology, 2015
- The Separation of Benign and Malignant Mesothelial ProliferationsArchives Of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, 2012
- Germline BAP1 mutations predispose to malignant mesotheliomaNature Genetics, 2011